ArticleInjury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention2026
Systematic review of health utility losses from injuries and violence.
Article in Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHealth utility values (0-1 scale) underpin quality-adjusted and disability-adjusted life years, used to quantify illness burden and evaluate intervention cost-effectiveness. This systematic review summarised available health utility estimates associated with non-fatal acute injuries and violence to support economic analysis.
methodsThe authors identified peer-reviewed studies through December 2025 reporting diagnosis-specific health utilities (1=full health) or disability weights (0=full health) from generic preference-based instruments (eg, EQ-5D) among general population samples. The primary outcome was the range of utility values by injury diagnosis and instrument. Body region, mechanism, intent, time since injury, geography, sample size, respondent type and contact method are also reported.
resultsThe authors summarised 468 estimates from 54 articles. Fractures, burns and traumatic brain injuries were most frequently studied; mechanism and intent were rarely reported. Utilities by diagnosis varied by study population, body region and time since injury. EQ-5D utilities for fractures ranged from 0.990 (near-zero loss) among children 9 months after an upper extremity fracture in the Netherlands to 0.139 (substantial loss) among older adults with pre-treatment proximal femoral fracture in Colombia. Disability weights for fractures ranged from 0 (no loss) for rib fractures 1 year post-treatment to 0.431 (substantial loss) during the acute phase of a pelvic fracture, assessed by general population respondents based on health state descriptions.
conclusionThis review offers streamlined access to utility inputs for economic analyses informing injury and violence prevention decisions. Analysts can consider available evidence broadly, select values matching the analytic context and use sensitivity analyses to strengthen validity and interpretability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.